Questions for Dr. Enfield

We don't really know much about Dr. Enfield's views and we don't know anything about her plans. I think it would be a good idea to get a meeting with Dr. Enfield and ask her some questions.

Here's what I want to know.

1. With the title of interim superintendent, will you feel that you have license to make significant changes in the schools and programs or are you concerned about the potential whiplash they would feel when a long-term superintendent implements his or her plans?

2. What is the nature and extent of your experience and expertise in financial and operational matters? Are you qualified to implement the needed financial reforms and internal controls that are missing in the District?

3. What do you see as the mission of the central administration, particularly in the area of teaching and learning? What is the scope of work for the central office in support of academics and how many people does the central office need to accomplish that work? How many consultants has the District hired in the past 18 months?

4. The community wants Seattle Public Schools to be open, honest, transparent, engaged, responsive and accountable. Do you share those values? What indications should we look for to confirm your commitment to these values? How have these values been expressed in your administration of the Program Placement process? How have these values been expressed in your administration of principal assignments?

5. How long does it take to dismiss an ineffective principal? How many principals have you dismissed in the 18 months you have been Chief Academic Officer?

6. In Seattle Public Schools, operational expediencies have taken precedence over academic priorities at nearly every decision. How will you stop the operations tail from wagging the academics dog? Examples include program placement decisions, the decision to make language immersion programs attendance area programs, the decision to overcrowd schools, and more.

7. What is a higher priority than providing early and effective interventions to all students working below grade level? What has been our commitment to reliably providing interventions? At a recent Board meeting it was described as a core duty of the district, but we were also told that the district is seeking private donations to fund it. If it is a core duty, why doesn't the district fund it? Is it, for example, a higher priority than a new web site? Is it is a higher priority than a brand new laptop for every student at STEM? Is it a higher priority than any of the consultants we have paid over the past eighteen months?

8. What responsibility does the central administration have to assure students, families, and the community of the quality and efficacy of schools and programs? What effort does the District make to assure the quality and efficacy of schools and programs? How, for example, does the District assure the quality and efficacy of the Spectrum program at Aki Kurose?

9. The Strategic Plan has been through a lot of change. Projects and initiatives are added or removed without notice to the public. The response to the APP Review, for example, was quietly dropped, as was the plan for an Alternative School Review. Many of the projects are long overdue. Many more are far overbudget. The public has never been advised of the status or the budgets for any strategic plan iniatives. Can you promise us a real, meaningful comprehensive Strategic Plan update this quarter - one with the timeline, budget, and status for every project and initiative?

10. The Capacity Management Report provided to the Board last month fell far below the requirements of the Policy. There are a number of other reports that the previous superintendent owed the Board that were never delivered. How long before you can establish a calendar for the reports required by policy? How critical are these reports to the Board's duty to provide oversight? How critical are these reports to the superintendent's duty to supervise?

11. On December 15 the District promised to make changes to the School Reports. It has been over two months. When will the promised changes be made? Why haven't they been made yet? The School Reports FAQ document was updated in February, but the promised changes were not included in the update. Why not?

12. Why does Rainier Beach High School have two principals?

13. Why does Bryant Elementary have two principals?

14. Why aren't high school students allowed to transfer schools at the semester break? If they aren't allowed to transfer schools, then why is student mobility as high as it is and why is student mobility used as a driving reason for the elements of curricular alignment that appear to be largely standardization?

Other questions we should ask her?

Comments

dan dempsey said…
The District has a pathetic math program k-12. On March 8, 2011 the SPS has an appeals court hearing over its "arbitrary and capricious" HS "Discovering" Math adoption.

#1 Are you planning to drop this appeal?

#2 If the SPS appeal should successfully appeal, are you planning on continuing a k-12 math program that produced 10th grade Math Test pass rates on the HSPE of 12.5% for Black students district wide. 3.9% for Black students at RBHS and 5.7% at Cleveland.

#3 The UW has supposedly assisted the District in Math ... often in a completely unsupervised unevaluated way. The results of this have been a disaster at RBHS and Cleveland. Will this be allowed to continue? Will Anna Maria de la Fuente continue in her position of Math Manager?
Anonymous said…
"Why does Rainier Beach High School have two principals?"

I would take this off the list as both principals are being removed at the end of the this year.

Better question would be what type of leadership do you see at the school going forward?

I would also ask, in relation to this question, is do you feel like there will be some stability going forward in principal assignments? And to you think you will move back to the model of school community input with regards to principals assignments?



Po3
hschinske said…
Number 7 has a stray "Is it a higher priority than" at the end -- did you mean to name another priority here?

Helen Schinske
Greg said…
Given that we are in the middle of a budget crisis, I would put questions on dealing with that front and center, since that is going to have immediate impact on children and teachers.

Two particular questions stand out: First, as Board member Kay Smith-Blum has asked, by when will she have the central administration's percentage of budget down from nearly 9% to or below the norm of other districts of 6%? Second, as Meg Diaz has asked, by when will she have published a line-item budget (which is also the norm for most other districts)?
John said…
I agree that the budget questions should be at the top of her list. I don't envy her on that.

I actually have more questions for the board. Mostly WTF?! questions.
Charlie Mas said…
I will definitely ask Dr. Enfield if it would be more cost effective to continue the appeal or to comply with the judge's order and re-do the decision.

I meant the question about the principals at Rainier Beach to be an jumping off point for a conversation about the future of the school.
Benjamin Leis said…
Why does Bryant have 2 principals? My wife and I were discussing that last night and it seemed like a waste offhand. I have to admit we have not been very impressed with our initial meetings with Kim Fox.
Central Mom said…
I was checking a reference to the Alliance for Education from a different thread and came across this just-released statement from its board:

We commend the Seattle School Boards’ choice of Dr. Susan Enfield to serve as Interim Superintendent. As Chief Academic Officer since 2009, Dr. Enfield has demonstrated a resolute commitment to the success of all students, high intellect, decisiveness and charisma. We have confidence she will lead the district ably.

Outgoing Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson deserves credit for many significant accomplishments during her four-year tenure: student gains in reading, math and graduation; a landmark teachers’ contract that links student achievement to teacher effectiveness for the first time; a return to neighborhood schools; and a robust new performance management system that holds schools and administrators accountable. We appreciate her service to Seattle Public Schools and her willingness to take on tough challenges.

Superintendent Enfield faces a significant task. Simultaneously she will need to rebuild trust, listen and lead. Provided her administration commits to a course of action that dramatically improves student outcomes and restores confidence in the District as a steward of public funds, we stand ready to partner with her in tackling the complex challenges ahead.

The School Board has faced several difficult decisions in recent weeks, all in the context of a painful budget cycle. Under the leadership of President Steve Sundquist, the board has acted with thoughtfulness, care and deliberation.

On Monday, 47,000 students returned to their classrooms from mid-winter break. Let us always remember that our obligation is to them. This is a difficult moment for Seattle Public Schools, but if handled well, the district and the city will be better for it. We remain more committed than ever to our mission to ensure every child in Seattle Public Schools is prepared for success in college, career and life.
Dorothy Neville said…
"Provided her administration commits to a course of action that dramatically improves student outcomes and restores confidence in the District as a steward of public funds, we stand ready to partner with her in tackling the complex challenges ahead."

So the Alliance fires a shot on across the bow. Didn't Maria commit to such a course of action? And where did that lead? How about honest incremental sustainable measures to increase student achievement?
spsmarketshare said…
I would like to hear Susan Enfield talk about what specific steps she will take to make the district more responsive to the needs and interests of parents?

It is an area the district has been sorely lacking under Goodloe-Johnson. It seems like the district has had the attitude that they can force people parents to do things -- like when they close schools or try to deal with overcrowding -- which I think often has the sad result of causing parents to leave our public schools (either going private or moving).

I have my favorite answer for this. I think if the district started emphasizing the importance of the metric of market share (% of children going to public school versus private in Seattle) to district staff, they would pay more attention to what parents want and why they leave for private school. But I am curious what Susan Enfield thinks is the solution.
Jan said…
Good questions all, Charlie (and Dan and others).

I agree with Greg and John that budget stuff has to go to the top of the list -- in part because of where we are in the budget cycle for next year. Listening to her various interviews on the radio today, I was heartened by the fact that although they are grabbing an temporary COO from inside (sorry -- the name wasn't familiar to me, so I can't pass it on), there is NOT attempt to fill the temporary CFO job from inside -- which is a relief since, based on the audit, I have no confidence that anyone inside in that department is competent to do the job.

One thing she DID say, though, was that she wants to meet with a LOT of folks and get a LOT of feedback. So while I certainly would like to know where she comes down on a lot of stuff, now is the time for folks on this blog, not on this blog, etc. etc. etc. to figure out how to give her input. You can bet that the A4E folks, the LEV folks, and all the other ed reform groups will waste no time campaigning for more of what MGJ served up! I don't think DeBell is a fan anymore, and I don't think Smith-Blum and Patu ever were. And several others are at least looking at election time, and may be willing to listen to voters for a change, and not just dollars.

I think few if any of us understood (I certainly didn't), when the 2007 board was bought and paid for, and MGJ sailed into town with her new improved ideas of a rubber stamp board and a "top down business model" what harm the ed reform intended to do to Seattle Schools. Now we know.

There are many in town who knew then, and know exactly now, what THEY want (more Gates, more Broad, more ed reform). I think there are MANY others who just want good schools for their kids, and don't see the duplicity of the slogans, the "we are doing it all for the kids" -- as the money flies off to Big Ed companies and consultants, and away from classroom interventions.

We need to get groups of parents, teachers, etc. in front of Enfield (and the Board) with our vision of how to run a District well, and improve student outcomes -- including the achievement gap -- with fewer dollars than we have ever spent NOT getting those results before -- because that is what she has in front of her, and that is what we have in front of us.

cont'd
Jan said…
cont'd

And -- remember, they now have to address all the toxicity, corruption, retaliation, etc., that is going on downtown. So -- not only do they need to cut people because we have to downsize central administration, they have to prune some people out because they are the WRONG people, and have contributed to the atmosphere where people are unwilling or unable to report problems and concerns.

We need to get the message out that if she is willing to focus like a laser on the best, most cost effective use of dollars IN SCHOOLS, we will back her, we -- the families, parents, and taxpayers who MGJ never wanted to hear from or even have to talk to or make eye contact with -- will help -- even if it means she has to part ways with the A4E, LEV, and all of the other high-priced, bad-data-using fake grass roots groups out there.

They didn't put her here. She owes them nothing. She isn't relying on them for her next job. She is in a remarkable position to dictate TO them -- rather than the other way around -- what she is and is not willing to spend the precious few tax dollars we have left on. Let's make sure it is on IAs, and targeted intervention, and people to help boost graduation rates (like in Everett). Let's make sure it is NOT on consulting contracts to standardize instruction, District dashboards that no one seems to use, expensive "school reportcards" that tell us no more than we already knew, MAP tests that tie up libraries with a test that isn't aligned to District standards, and fancy re-does of the District website that remove access to lots of documents and information we used to have, and give us a worse website going forward.

She says there is a 30 day plan to sort of get from last night's meeting to some sort of "going forward" point. I guess, Charlie, my question would be -- given hard dates for budgets and enrollment coming up, which of the items you have listed does she see as stuff that has to be dealt with as part of the initial 30 day plan. Of those that are NOT, where and when do they get addressed, and what will be the process for pulling in families, teachers, as part of the process going forward.
seattle citizen said…
I would ask Dr. Enfield if she will be cutting all ties with the various foundations, alliances and coalitions that have proven to be not supporters of Seattle school children but rather conduits for outside reformistas who are following a national agenda to demonize teachers and privatize public schools.

In order to gain trust with the parents/guardians of this city, she will have to break ties with these groups until they agree to assist with day-to-day activities and funding that is needed in schools and classrooms, instead of merely funneling Gates, Broad and Walton money into the district to fund their desired "reforms." For instance, it is the Alliance, I'm sure, that is funding the district's use of Karen Waters' Strategies 360 as a PR tool. The district can do its own PR, it has no need to hire Ms Waters, who is/was the figurehead of the Our Schools Coalition, a group that unethically was given the names and numbers of Seattle families and educators by the district. Ms Waters , funded by Gates via the Alliance, causes more distrust than her PR efforts will overcome.

Ask the superintendent if she intends to restore trust by demanding that all outside interests have NO say in the operations of SPS. We would love to have them help with district needs, but on our terms, not theirs.
Jan said…
Dorothy: your comment made me realize -- this thing was totally "out of the control" of the puppet masters. Admittedly, MGJ brought Enfield here -- but they (A4E, LEV, Stand for Children, etc.) had NOTHING to do (as far as I know) with the Board's decision to select her as the interim superintendent. They didn't get to buy the votes by contributing ridiculous amounts of money to someone's campaign. They didn't have time to put any cute push polls together. They didn't get to manipulate people's opinions by showing up here and there in red shirts demanding one scheme or another to siphon money OUT of the schools and INTO the hands of TFA, or NWEA, or whomever.

Shot across the bow, indeed. But the "roar" the Board is hearing right now isn't the sound of the ed reform folks. It is the sound of the teachers and parents who filled the room on Wednesday night, and those who responded to the "unscientific" KOMO poll (I was driving, so I couldn't take notes and can't recall the exact poll question -- whether it was the strategic plan or something similar but not exactly that -- at any rate, 84% gave the MGJ's leadership ideas a thumbs down.

Now that MGJ is not here to carry water for them, it is no wonder they are feeling a little crabby.
Anonymous said…
Potemkin Reform of Deform.

The board rubber stamped every reformist garbage pile that came from the Great Bill and his toadies. What has significantly changed to benefit kids, unless you define the increase in the number of files created using powerpoint as a positive result.

They're just going to rename all their baloney - call it pate and serve it with Dijon instead of cheap yellow mustard.

They couldn't have planned a better distraction for doubling down on teach for awhile, principal for awhile, and consultants for a century.

hopehaha
Bird said…
I'd ask where the current line-item operating budget is, and I'd ask to see a line-item budget for the proposed budget.

I'd ask to see a complete list of central administration employees, with org chart and salaries.
peonypower said…
I've heard from board members that Enfield was under the thumb of her boss, but I' m not so sure. Enfield's last boss - "Hurricane Vicki Phillips" former superintendent of Portland sounds a lot like MGJ. She closed schools, and standardized curriculum despite parent desire for local school control left Portland to join the Gates Foundation. Hmmmm

Enfield's resume is rife with claims of implementing "data-driven decisions in schools" and whenever I read that line I wonder what data and whose decisions.

I am willing to give her a chance, but the transparency and communication will have to be Bose speaker loud and cellophane clear.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
dan dempsey said…
Interesting to see that the Alliance is as full of nonsense as ever:

"Outgoing Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson deserves credit for many significant accomplishments during her four-year tenure: student gains in reading, math and graduation; a landmark teachers’ contract that links student achievement to teacher effectiveness for the first time; a return to neighborhood schools; and a robust new performance management system that holds schools and administrators accountable. We appreciate her service to Seattle Public Schools and her willingness to take on tough challenges"

Enfield's idea of meeting with lots of folks is interesting.

I would like to see her intelligently apply relevant data to make decisions. If she will not do that she needs to be told to pack her bags again..... she has become a good bag packer.

The Math appeal hearing is Tuesday March 8 ... so what is her intelligent view of that?

Here is a background piece on Dr. Enfield from the PI.
Anonymous said…
What the hell else will the Alliance do? Take their (our) money elsewhere?!

grumpy
Patrick said…
So the Alliance thinks that if test scores go down, it's the teacher's fault, but if test scores go up it's to the superintendent's credit?
Jan said…
What test scores went up? I thought other than a few middle school scores, most of them didn't, and some went down.
Michael Rice said…
When MGJ sent the letter to the Rainier Beach Community announcing that we were eligible to apply for a School Improvement Grant (SIG), she wrote: "so every student leaves Rainier Beach High School college or career ready."

My question to Dr. Enfield: What is the Seattle Public Schools doing to ensure that every student who enters Rainier Beach High School is high school ready?

Now I know this is a question that applies to all the high schools in Seattle, it is just that RB is the one that is going the SIG process.
cascade said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
cascade said…
Jan, yes, this year's state of the district report, delivered by MGJ herself, showed little-to-no progress in the majority of areas, and glaring instances of decreased scores.

For the Alliance to say otherwise is just plain wrong. Did the alliance learn nothing from the 17 percent stat scandal? Oh wait, their leadership actually spread that number around, didn't they.
seattle citizen said…
Jan and Patrick, for the Alliance/Gates Coalition, test scores are all that matter, and they simply MUST, when touting what they like (the superintendent in this case), reflexively suggest that test scores have gone up. It's like some weird tic or something. It reflects the strange rose-tinted view they have of their reformers and their reforms.

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Why the Majority of the Board Needs to be Filled with New Faces

Who Is A. J. Crabill (and why should you care)?